Agenda item

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) introduced the report to the Sub-Committee. He explained that they were being asked to consider whether the licensee remains fit and proper to hold a combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Drivers licence issued by this authority, following a complaint of a safeguarding nature received by Licensing.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) explained that one piece of additional information had been received since the agenda pack had been published. He said that this was an email from BANES Passenger Transport dated 22^nd April 2025 indicating that the licensee had been removed from their approved drivers list.

Councillor Shaun Hughes asked for confirmation that despite not providing their MOT and insurance documents on time to the Licensing department, the licensee’s vehicle had always been covered.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) replied that the licensee’s vehicle had always had valid MOT and insurance cover in place.

The licensee addressed the Sub-Committee regarding the safeguarding complaint and stated that they had made an out of character act and was not a threat to the children that had been travelling in their vehicle. The licensee said that they were sad that the children had been upset and that they hadn’t appeared to be on the day of the journey. They stated that they would not do the same thing again and were saddened by their actions.

The licensee said that at the time they were under some pressure from attempting to start a new business and had already agreed to pick up a friend prior to accepting the school run.

The licensee explained that they had not declared to Veezu that they were picking up a friend, now a driver in their business, as they didn’t want them to know that they were forming their own business.

The licensee said that the children appeared to be ok on arrival at school, but having seen the text messages to their parents they understand how they felt at the time.

The licensee said that they had not answered a call on the journey initially as they were driving and was then informed by one of the children that it was their mum trying to call.

The licensee stated that there had been no previous incidents relating to their driving.

Councillor Ann Morgan asked if they had learned from the incident.

The licensee replied that they had and understood the decision taken by the Passenger Transport Team.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) asked the licensee who they had spoken to on the phone during the journey.

The licensee replied that it was a Veezu operator.

Councillor Shaun Hughes asked for clarification as to who the licensee was picking up that morning and where they needed to take them to.

The licensee replied that it was a friend, another taxi driver, whose car had broken down and that they were taking them back to their vehicle that was in Victoria Park. They said that the request had then come through to cover a school run.

Councillor Shaun Hughes asked the licensee if they would normally speak to parents when picking up.

The licensee replied that they did not as the children were normally waiting outside their home.

Councillor Shaun Hughes asked if the boys were worried on the journey.

The licensee replied that they did not appear to be.

Councillor Shaun Hughes asked if the status of the person picked up, the other driver, could be verified.

The Public Protection Officer (Licensing) confirmed that the person was indeed a licensed driver.

Councillor George Tomlin asked the licensee if they were aware of the conditions of their licence regarding submitting documents.

The licensee replied that they were and had connected reminder notices to the renewal of their licence.

Councillor Ann Morgan asked the licensee if they could comment further on the allegation of using inappropriate language.

The licensee replied that on this occasion they were picking up a child from school for the first time and wanted to be sure that the child would be able to find them. They added that they were waiting for a space to park when approached by a member of the public. The licensee said that they had not been aggressive, but acknowledged that they should not have sworn.

The Team Leader, Legal Services asked the licensee if they could give any further response in relation to the allegation of parking their vehicle in a manner that was obstructing recycling vehicles.

The licensee replied that they had used to park in an area for around 20 minutes to visit their mum and had always felt that there was enough room for vehicles to pass.

The licensee gave a summing up statement and said that they had made an out of character mistake, for which they were very regretful. They added that they were very good at their job and would never do such a thing again.

Decision & Reasons

Members have had to consider if the licensee is fit and proper to continue to hold their combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s licence in the light of a recent safeguarding complaint from a parent and their BANES licensing record. In doing so Members took account of the Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act 1976, Human Rights Act 1998, case law and the Council Policy. 

Members had one lot of additional information comprising an email from BANES Passenger Transport dated 22/04/25 indicating that the licensee had been removed from their approved drivers list which meant they could not fulfil Passenger Transport contracts anymore.

Members heard from the licensee in oral representations and read what they had said in their written accounts to the Licensing Department. The Licensee indicated that their decision to pick up a fellow driver when fulfilling a home to school contract was very out of character, but they felt there was no threat to the children at any time. They described how they were very upset reading the text messages of the children subsequently and realised their mistake now.

The licensee indicated that they had been carrying out home to school contracts since before the pandemic and that the children like them. The licensee accepted their mistake in failing to provide the insurance documentation on three separate occasions, they did not try to excuse their behaviour and said that they have processes in place to ensure that this does not happen in future. They acknowledged that they had parked in an area reserved for recycling vehicles and that there was a disagreement when they had parked on the yellow zig zags outside of a school premises. They explained that the latter was so that the child could easily see them at pick up.

Members noted that the Local Authority Designated Officer had indicated that the safeguarding complaint did not meet the threshold for their involvement.

Members had concerns regarding the lapse in judgement the licensee had shown when they had collected another driver during a home to school contract trip. They thought the licensee was sincerely upset about the impact that this had had on the children and appreciated why this was a mistake not to be repeated. Members concluded that the licensee had learnt their lesson and Members asked themselves if they would be comfortable if a loved one travelled in a taxi with the licensee, and they were.

Members noted however, the licensee’s non-compliance with the conditions of their licence relating to the provision of MOT and insurance certificates in the requisite period. Compliance with these conditions is vital so that the Council can be assured that the safety of the public when travelling in a BANES licensed vehicle is not compromised.

On balance, Members find that the licensee is a fit and proper person to continue to hold the combined Hackney Carriage/Private Hire Driver’s Licence however, they issue a final warning to them that: 

1. They must ensure that they comply with all requirements, conditions and legal obligations upon them as a BANES licensed driver.
2. They must put measures in place to ensure that they comply with (i) above.
3. They must be mindful of their role as an ambassador for BANES, behave with professionalism, be mindful of their safeguarding responsibilities and ensure a safe journey for their passengers.
4. They must be honest in their conduct as a BANES licensed driver.

If the Licensee is referred back to the Licensing Sub Committee following further non-compliance with the requirements of their licence they are at risk of revocation of their licence.